Ending Obamacare

Among conservatives, there’s little argument that Obamacare should be abolished. ‘It’s time to get government out of our lives,’ they say.

They make many very valid points. Those same folks have expressed concerns that instead, very real and tangible things should be done for consumers because in some cases, health insurance companies have gotten out of hand.

For example, many people believe that health insurance companies should not be able to deny coverage to children born with diabetes, heart defects, or other health problems. After all, it wasn’t their fault they have those problems. And they believe that adults should not be denied coverage when they change insurance companies, or because their family history predisposes them to certain health problems.

Also, women should not be denied treatment or coverage for breast or cervical cancer. Nor should men be denied coverage or treatment for prostate cancer. And neither men nor women should be kicked off insurance rolls once they get sick, or make a health insurance claim.

Another thing many believe should be reigned in is the practice of “cherry picking” – the practice of determining who decides who gets health insurance, and who does not.

Insurance companies should not deny payment for procedures based upon a simple honest mistake made on an insurance application – such as overlooking a line, not checking a box, misspelling a word, or forgetting to dot an “i” or cross a “t.”

Most folks also say they would feel better if their health insurance company didn’t surprise them with unannounced rate increases – like doubling or tripling the policy premiums without justifying them – and if they used at least 80% of the premiums to pay for coverage of procedures and medicines, rather than being used to pay for CEO compensation, stockholder payout, advertising, operating expenses and overhead.

 

Yes, instead of passing Obamacare, those are the things people want and need.

But, did you know that all those provisions and many more good ones like them are what constitute “Obamacare”?

For example, there are rewards and incentives to hospitals for increasing efficiency, decreasing waste, punishing fraud and abuse, and increasing accountability. Why should Medicare or Medicaid pay for a problem that was caused by a careless surgeon, or infection caused by a sloppy nurse? Under the new rules to soon take effect, neither hospitals nor physicians will be paid for costs associated with treating such ineptitude.

When a patient is discharged from a hospital stay, why should anyone be compensated when that same patient is readmitted to the hospital for the same problem less than 30 days later? Under the new rules soon to take effect, they won’t.

Yes, those are just a few of the many good things that will occur as part of “Obamacare.”

Which of them would you like to eliminate?